SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
BA League Top 20 Prospects
|
Post by joshv02 on Oct 4, 2013 11:45:49 GMT -5
Funny, Kukuk doesn't look Druish.
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Oct 4, 2013 12:23:44 GMT -5
Owens 4th, Swihart 5th, Cecchini 6th, Mookie 7th, Marrero 13th. Salem not only won the Championship they did it with prospects.
Notes:
* Observers liked how Swihart blocked balls behind the plate. It is credited to him doing drills before games.
* League observers feel comfortable that Cecchini will hit for more power due to his size and bat speed.
|
|
|
Post by oilcansman on Oct 4, 2013 13:03:21 GMT -5
Anybody who says Maddux didn't have good stuff never saw him pitch. He didn't have great velocity, but his stuff was nasty. Of course, his command was legendary.
I'll never understand why people compare prospects to hall of famers. HOFers are aberrational talents. Saying a prospect projects to be an aberration is silly. If I'm a GM I would feel much more comfortable with a scout that compares a medium velocity, good command prospect to Jamie Moyer (more of a soft tosser) or John Lackey than Maddux or Glavine.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 4, 2013 20:30:23 GMT -5
Further posts on the tangent will be deleted.
Seriously, Swihart got ranked ahead of Cecchini and nobody bats an eye?
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Oct 4, 2013 20:49:49 GMT -5
Further posts on the tangent will be deleted. Seriously, Swihart got ranked ahead of Cecchini and nobody bats an eye? Many supposed top sites also have made a special mention/knock that he lacks power. Like it automatically makes him less of a player.. Jeez.. Carney Lansford and Wade Boggs were pretty good 3b in Boston and neither of those guys were big power, good size.. I wonder how big the knocks were from scouts and other articles on those 2 years ago because they lacked power and look how many batting titles those 2 racked up? For that matter? Pete Runnels wasn't too shabby with the bat at Fenway either and he had -0- power, yet hit .300+ all 5 Sox seasons and won a cpl batting titles playing middle IF. Sometimes I really hope the Sox FO are smarter than these periodicals that print all this hogwash.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 4, 2013 23:42:23 GMT -5
Yeah, I think there's a lot of focus on what Cecchini can't do (power, ultimate defensive position) as opposed to what he can do (hit for average, get on base, at least doubles power, great makeup). In a lot of folks' mind, his lack of elite offensive upside combined with his spot on the lower end of the defensive spectrum limit his ceiling, which may be true. But he's also an extraordinarily high floor prospect, and a lock for a .350 OBP in the major leagues. That has a ton of value, even in left field (see: Nava, Daniel).
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Oct 5, 2013 1:58:21 GMT -5
These lists always skew towards the 'upside' guys. Swihart made great strides this year defensively to the point when he may be a average+ defender at a premium position and he also has the 'potential' to hit for average+ power and plus contact with plus on base skills. Even though the chance he reaches this ceiling is not high, due to Cecchini's already mentioned weaknesses (which appear unlikely to be overcome at this point) i don't see how it is surprising.
If anything, this site has always seemed to rank high-floor guys much higher than the national press; which is for the better in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Oct 5, 2013 3:21:46 GMT -5
Most of the staff here rated Swihart higher than the slot he currently has on the site. To have BA also concur is no surprise. I do concur that having him rated higher than Cechinni is a clear surprise though.
What we all are seeing, I think, is that Swihart may be an even better defensive prospect than he is offensively, and I recognize that this is probably a new realization. This is not a completely new development though. He was improving quickly on the defensive end even last year. He's proven fairly durable so far as well and seems to consistently do better as the year goes on. The kid is a tremendous natural athlete. It was logical for him to continue to improve over time, and potentially achieve a higher level of excellence long term as a result. He has the goods.
Possibly the fact that Cechinni was there for less time than Swihart is potentially a factor as well. Gotta respect BA in this analysis. It is from a very informed source. To me, BA is one of the very best evaluators of talent out there.
|
|
|
Post by bosox81 on Oct 5, 2013 6:15:46 GMT -5
Swihart had 6 Passed Balls and 42 CS% in 101 games as a 21 yr old. I know the limitations of defensive stats for catchers, but in the few years of following prospects, I've never heard of numbers that good for such a young prospect.
|
|
|
Post by 1mpaz10 on Oct 5, 2013 6:58:25 GMT -5
Christian Vazquez caught 46% of runners, however allowed 23 pass balls.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,981
|
Post by jimoh on Oct 5, 2013 7:11:58 GMT -5
Further posts on the tangent will be deleted. Seriously, Swihart got ranked ahead of Cecchini and nobody bats an eye? Isn't a crucial factor that Cecchini spent only half the year in Salem?
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Oct 5, 2013 7:43:20 GMT -5
Seriously, Swihart got ranked ahead of Cecchini and nobody bats an eye? Is there any argument for Cecchini other than his stat line? Actual question, not rhetorical.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 5, 2013 8:01:26 GMT -5
Seriously, Swihart got ranked ahead of Cecchini and nobody bats an eye? Is there any argument for Cecchini other than his stat line? Actual question, not rhetorical. Arguably has a much higher floor than Swihart. I think the statement that he might be a better defensive prospect than offensive right now is correct (in that he might be such, not that it's definitely true). We heard great things about his defense all year. He has been much better than advertised back there, not that he was supposed to be bad.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Oct 5, 2013 8:18:41 GMT -5
How low can your floor really be if you're a good defensive catcher who has any offensive skills at all?
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Oct 5, 2013 8:33:16 GMT -5
How low can your floor really be if you're a good defensive catcher who has any offensive skills at all? Well the team has a very solid foundation, oak floors it you like (pun intended), with both Vazquez and Swihart making their way up the ladder.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 5, 2013 8:53:25 GMT -5
How low can your floor really be if you're a good defensive catcher who has any offensive skills at all? Good defense for High A isn't necessarily MLB defense, but it's not like I said he's got a low floor. They're both elite prospects, but I'd say Cecchini's floor is higher, which is why the entire staff had him higher than Swihart, even those who were highest on the latter and lowest on the former.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Oct 5, 2013 10:17:19 GMT -5
How low can your floor really be if you're a good defensive catcher who has any offensive skills at all? Good defense for High A isn't necessarily MLB defense, but it's not like I said he's got a low floor. They're both elite prospects, but I'd say Cecchini's floor is higher, which is why the entire staff had him higher than Swihart, even those who were highest on the latter and lowest on the former. I know, but if we're talking about who has the higher floor, it takes a LOT for me to choose the 3B/LF over the guy who can probably stick at catcher. Catchers. Play. Forever. And if he doesn't have Cecchini's offensive numbers, he's also a level more advanced that Cecchini was at the same age and there's at least some scouts who like his bat better on a tools level. I mean honestly, if I'm ranking them, I call them both four star prospects and throw my hands up as to who's ahead of who. But I think you can make a reasonable case for Swihart. It's not like ranking Margot above Cecchini or something.
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Oct 5, 2013 18:52:59 GMT -5
That "high floor" tag also irritates me in a way for some guys who play a position compared to others, say WMB, just because WMB had power at 3b. We all no the radical differences between the 2. The potential upside could even be another Billy Mueller in Cecchini.
Would a Mueller type be rated higher than someone who has the upside of hitting 20HR and a .320OBP? Why would that player that type of prospect get a higher rating for being a 3b/ss, even 2b just because they come through a system at one of those positions there?
Because it has always been that way? I am as much of a baseball traditionalist as there has ever been, but this just takes it too far. Bats can be found.
|
|
|
Post by mjammz on Oct 5, 2013 20:36:21 GMT -5
I have said this for a long time, but outside of Xander, Garin Cecchini is the safest prospect in the system. I feel very confident that he will be at least an average major league player, his ability to get the bat on the ball and baseball IQ are excellent and project nicely toward a long MLB career.
Swihart is still a boom or bust prospect for me.
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Oct 5, 2013 22:15:00 GMT -5
I think prospect list, though I don't really like them, should be about potential big league value much more than perceived safeness. Yes i believe it has to be part of the equation but I'd put more emphasis on potential specially on up the middle positions.
Swihart is showing extra-base pop (38 XBH), solid approach (14.9 K%, 9.7 BB%), improving defense all while at an age appropriate level, playing one of the most difficult positions and valuable positions in the game right now. In fact I don't know why there hasn't been more talk about him and his excellent year. He's showing all-star potential right now.
Cecchini is a very good prospect and I'm not trying to knock him, though I did go to watch him play in Brooklyn a few years back, all he got was an infield single and the next day when I couldn't go he hit a oppo jack so he loses points there. All I'm trying to say is that Swihart had a darn good season and deserves some praise.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,931
|
Post by ericmvan on Oct 6, 2013 1:11:33 GMT -5
Most of the staff here rated Swihart higher than the slot he currently has on the site. To have BA also concur is no surprise.... Gotta respect BA in this analysis. It is from a very informed source. To me, BA is one of the very best evaluators of talent out there. It's worth noting that these actually aren't BA ratings per se, but ratings by the league managers (and coaches, maybe) as polled by BA. Not that I think they have them actually fill out a ballot, but they are based on conversations with the managers where each presumably mentions anyone who impressed them, and then BA decides on a ranking based on frequency of mentions and enthusiasm shown. Obviously they influence BA's final rankings a good deal, but BA knows things the managers don't. None of the Carolina League managers are factoring in the success that Cecchini had in AA, for instance; they're just reporting how impressed they were by his play in high-A.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Oct 6, 2013 12:16:12 GMT -5
I have said this for a long time, but outside of Xander, Garin Cecchini is the safest prospect in the system. I feel very confident that he will be at least an average major league player, his ability to get the bat on the ball and baseball IQ are excellent and project nicely toward a long MLB career. Swihart is still a boom or bust prospect for me. A lot of people, myself included, doubt Cecchini's future power,but it is important to note that Swilhart has less power than Cecchini and that reason alone,I would rank Cecchini ahead of Swilhart.
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Oct 9, 2013 9:49:29 GMT -5
* League observers feel comfortable that Cecchini will hit for more power due to his size and bat speed. This is a key point. I was expecting more power this season after he bulked up, but of course did not expect offensive dominance with limited HR count. To some extent every year that goes by without the power showing up reduces the chances it ever will -- but power development is funny sometimes, or oftentimes. I'll try to be patient and wait for the power to come in the next 1-4 years.
|
|
CMF
Rookie
Posts: 91
|
Post by CMF on Oct 11, 2013 8:34:04 GMT -5
IL Top 20
1) Xander Bogaerts 8) Jackie Bradley 13) Allen Webster
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 11, 2013 9:43:34 GMT -5
For anyone confused like I was, they did skip the Eastern League. Scheduled for Friday.
|
|
|